SPFL Honest Mistakes in September '21
I outlined a framework to assess the impact of Honest Mistakes in the SPFL..
I showed the impact on Expected Points gained / lost due to Honest Mistakes in July and August.
Today, we cover the rest of the season to date.
I am indebted to the Yorkshire Whistler for providing expert judgement of these key potentially game changing moments and providing an unbiased assessment of the correct decision.
I do not always agree with his conclusions mainly because a) I am biased; b) I do not know the Laws of the Game intimately as he does; and c) I do not have experience of refereeing football matches.
You may also relate to those constraints. Be honest!
As described in the framework, where an in-game decision is deemed incorrect, there is an Expected Points impact for the “wronged” team and this is indicated.
I’ll keep a running tally.
Here we go.
19/09/21 The Rangers vs Motherwell
Date 19/09/21 Referee Steven McLean Game TRFC v Motherwell Game Minute 12th
Incident The Rangers open the scoring through Sakala Outcome Goal awarded Evidence SPFL: The Season So VAR - The Celtic Exchange
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict A tight call but Sakala is half a yard offside when the ball is flicked on to him by his team mate.
Verdict: Incorrect decision. Goal should have been disallowed for offside.
Expected Points
Outcome
The Rangers +0.7 xPts
25/09/21 Dundee vs The Rangers
Date 25/09/21 Referee Bobby Madden Game Dundee v TRFC Game Minute 59th
Incident McMullan brought down by McLaughlin in the box Outcome Penalty to Dundee and Yellow Card for McLaughlin Evidence SPFL: The Season So VAR - The Celtic Exchange
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict Clearly there is no doubt about the decision to award the penalty for the challenge. The question here is: was a yellow card suitable punishment or should a red card have been shown for the DOGSO (denying obvious goal scoring opportunity)?
Law 12: Fouls & Misconduct states:
Where a player commits an offence against an opponent within their own penalty area which denies an opponent an obvious goal-scoring opportunity and the referee awards a penalty kick, the offender is cautioned if the offence was an attempt to play the ball; in all other circumstances (e.g. holding, pulling, pushing, no possibility to play the ball etc.) the offending player must be sent off.
McLaughlin makes a genuine attempt to block the expected shot by spreading his legs and making himself as wide as possible. He makes no attempt to intentionally trip the oncoming striker and his leg is maintained on the ground throughout the blocking motion.
Verdict: Correct decision. Penalty and yellow card issued.
Expected Points
Outcome
No impact
26/09/21 Celtic vs Dundee United
Incident 1
Date 26/09/21 Referee Kevin Clancy Game Celtic v Dundee Utd Game Minute 14th
Incident Fuchs challenges McCarthy Outcome Foul awarded and Yellow Card to Fuchs Evidence SPFL: The Season So VAR - The Celtic Exchange
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict Having watched this one several times over and you can make a case for both a yellow card sanction as Fuchs clearly commits a reckless challenge but also on watching the replay, the studs are high and by missing the ball, Fuchs leaves himself open to a dismissal for a challenge with excessive force/brutality. In real time I expected a caution, but with the hindsight of the video replay, a sending off would have been justified.
Verdict - Incorrect Decision. Red card/Sending off offence.
Expected Points
Outcome
Celtic -0.35 xPts
Incident 2
Date 26/09/21 Referee Kevin Clancy Game Celtic v Dundee Utd Game Minute 22nd
Incident Starfelt goes down under challenge outside box
Clark goes down in penalty area under challenge from Carter-Vickers
Outcome No fouls awarded Evidence https://twitter.com/mikejp1967/status/1442443839218855940?s=21
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict (Having reviewed Ref Watch with Dermot Gallagher)
I feel Mr Gallagher is being quite diplomatic and complimentary of the referee when he refers to ‘consistency’ of the match referees decision making. From the referees perspective, there could well be an element in his thought process of ‘I’ve not given the first so I’m not giving the second one either’. Indeed, both challenges appear to be similar in nature.
One thing not highlighted by Mr Gallagher, is the referees relatively poor positioning. As the Dundee Utd player advances into the penalty box, the referee is still a good 20yds behind play and not in the preferred wider-angle position. For me crucially, and as consequence of his distanced position, there are 3 players obscured his view of the challenge inside the box at the instance it is made.
I suspect this played a part in the penalty decision not being given. Judging the challenge in isolation, a penalty kick should have been awarded.
However, I also feel the initial challenge on the Celtic defender was also worthy of a defensive free kick decision. The Dundee Utd player appears to clatter into the defenders back in an attempt to play the ball.
Verdict - Incorrect on field decisions. Defensive free kick should have been given, negating the penalty not given decision.
Expected Points
Outcome
No impact
Incident 3
Date 26/09/21 Referee Kevin Clancy Game Celtic v Dundee Utd Game Minute 45nd
Incident Ajeti scores for Celtic Outcome Goal disallowed for foul by Ajeti Evidence SPFL: The Season So VAR - The Celtic Exchange
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict From an initial shot that rebounds off the crossbar, Ajeti is deemed to have impeded the Dundee Utd’ defender attempt to head the ball.
The referee is well positioned here just outside the penalty area and has an unobscured view. He believes Ajeti’s left arm nudges the defender in the back and although there seems to be an over exaggeration of the level of contact, I also believe this was the correct decision. The nudge in the lower back would be enough to knock the defender off balance, as he is already in motion to head the ball away.
Verdict: Correct decision. Goal ruled out for infringement.
Expected Points
Outcome
No impact
Incident 4
Date 26/09/21 Referee Kevin Clancy Game Celtic v Dundee Utd Game Minute 73rd
Incident Abada is challenged for a high ball by Siegrist the DU keeper Outcome No foul awarded Evidence SPFL: The Season So VAR - The Celtic Exchange
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict Again, another decision that is not clear cut. As the ball is played over the top of the Dundee Utd defence, keeper Siegrist catches Abada with his studs as he heads the ball clear.
In real time my first thought was no foul and having watched the challenge in slow motion I am still giving the keeper the benefit of the doubt. His eyes and gaze appear to maintained only on the ball as he goes to head the ball away. The studs slightly catch Abada but this is as Siegrist’s body motion is already on the downwards trajectory and I believe to be accidental.
Verdict: Correct decision. No foul
Expected Points
Outcome
No impact
03/10/21 The Rangers vs Hibernian
Incident 1
Date 03/10/21 Referee Nick Walsh Game TRFC v Hibs Game Minute 5th
Incident Lundstram challenges Doig (?) Outcome No foul awarded Evidence SPFL: The Season So VAR - The Celtic Exchange
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict This kind of challenge can really split opinion. There is clearly an element of the Rangers player stretching for the ball here and naturally the studs have to come off the ground as part of the leg extension.
There are a couple of key, subtle differences to the Porteous challenge. Firstly, I would say Lundstram is still in control of his body, the tackle is a downwards motion aimed clearly at the ball. Also this is a ball first, rather than ball/man at same time, kind of challenge.
Verdict - Correct decision - Based on clearly winning the ball and without an element of ‘going over top’ I believe this was a no-foul challenge.
Expected Points
Outcome
No impact
Incident 2
Date 03/10/21 Referee Nick Walsh Game TRFC v Hibs Game Minute 30th
Incident Porteous challenge on Aribo Outcome Foul awarded and Red Card for Porteous Evidence SPFL: The Season So VAR - The Celtic Exchange
Yorkshire Whistler Verdict Here the Hibs defender is at full stretch and in real time it’s not clear what contact is made with either ball or man.
Having watched the replay, it soon becomes apparent this is quite a dangerous lunge with all of the defender’s body off the ground as part of the tackling motion. The studs appear to go over the top of the ball and the Rangers player could have been seriously injured had more contact happened. I would deem this a tackle with excessive force that endangered the other players safety.
Verdict - correct decision, sending off offence
Expected Points
Outcome
No impact
Summary
My thanks as always to the Yorkshire Whistler.
As always, I personally didn’t agree on all counts but I bow to, and accept neutral, expert opinion on these matters.
A slightly better month for SPFL officialdom. Of the 8 incidents in this period, 5 were deemed to be correct outcomes.
Of the 3 incorrect outcomes, the Expected Points tallies were affected in 2 decisions thus:
What have we learned so far? Well, SPFL referees do make a lot of mistakes on crucial decisions, However, many of the decisions that get social media excited (e.g. the Porteous sending off) are correct.
Only 8 games into a crucial SPFL campaign, and 6 major calls have impacted the points either Celtic or The Rangers could be expected to achieve.
At the moment, based on xPts, Celtic have 1.4 less points than expected due to Honest Mistakes and The Rangers have 1.24 more points than expected.
Over a 38-game season, that differential, if these patterns continue, could see another 4.7 points advantage to The Rangers making 7.3 points advantage total. But very early days and the trend could of course change.
We all told by experts that these Honest Mistakes will even themselves out over the season and net/net the impact will be neutral. That remains the expectation.
More when the action returns.